WordWolf

Ah. NOW I remember that part.

Ok, next quote.

"Sinba! His face black, his eyes red!!"

Anchorman?

CORRECT!

Will Farrell, I believe, improvised a LOT during the filming, and all or most of Ron Burgundy's

exclamations ("Sweet Knights of Columbus!") were improvised.

The street-fight scene between all the newsteams is a "must-see" scene,

and the exchange immediately following it is possibly the funnies set of lines

in the whole movie. A friend and I find it the most quotable set, too.

Go, Pirate!

Second clue:

"Sometimes you get the bear; sometimes the bear gets you."

George

I think that's "Data's Day,"

an interesting look at 24 hours in the "life of the android,

where those of us using our gut instincts can tell that the logical conclusion's

blinding him to the truth, since he's basing it on a false premise.

(i.e. 'I'm dealing with a Vulcan, and all Vulcans can be trusted...')

Riker utters this line about the bear around the end, if I recall correctly.

Yes it was.

Meanwhile, I'll be here refraining from eating this supposed foodstuff

that strongly resembles motor oil, and see if someone can answer you.

While I was on the subject,

what's with the "limiting Scripture to EXACTLY SEVEN" business?

2 Timothy 3:16

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"

If we're supposed to classify all Scripture arbitrarily into 4 categories,

why only do the Church Epistles?

Are the other books not "Scripture?"

Or are the Epistles just EASIER TO SLAP A LABEL ON?

And if you want to downgrade the other books, remember all the references

to the rest of the Bible as "Scripture" before you do....

Oakspear: I'm sure there are sections of each epistle which contain elements of all 4. Remember they always said there is no reproof and correction for Thessalonians because God is going to pull off the hope and there can be no possibility of error? Well, twice it says to comfort one another with these words, so if people didn't do that they could be reproved, right?

But VP kept saying that the order of the church epistles did not vary in all greek texts, which wasn't true of the gospels or the other NT stuff and he (VP) treated them as a curriculum. Romans, Corinthians, and Galatians as doctrine reproof and correction to the individual believer, Ephesians Phillipians and Collosians as doctrine reproof and correction to the church as a whole, and Thessalonians as doctrine of the hope, the great equalizer.

Like I said, there can be elements of doctrine reproof correction and instruction in righteousness anywhere, but I see no evidence to refute VPs take on that.

If you put enough effort into it, it is possible to come up with permutations that fit ANY sort

of pattern. Don't believe me? Review all the people who have been identified as "666".

(My personal favourite was that Ronald Wilson Reagan's names all have 6 letters in them.

It meant nothing, because slapping a label on something and imposing a grid on it means

nothing in and of itself.)

The grid that was imposed here by Bullinger was:

A) 'all Epistles' was reduced to only the church Epistles

B) all 9 Church Epistles were reduced to 7 Church Epistles

C) 4 things Scripture is profitable for was reduced to 3

If the numbers weren't squeezed,

only counting the Church Epistles, we would have the grid composed of the following:

Romans=Doctrine

I Corinthians=Reproof

II Corinthians=Correction

Galatians=Instruction in Righteousness

Ephesians=Doctrine

Phillipians=Reproof

Colossians=Corrections

I Thessalonians=Instruction in Righteousness

II Thessalonians=Doctrine

As to the order of the Church Epistles in Scripture, if there's a place in Scripture

stating that the order of the Church Epistles in Scripture means something,

then maybe it matters. Otherwise, it is a man's opinion that it does.

That means it is "private interpretation" (as vpw called such things.)

Just for fun, what would the order of the Pastoral Epistles and General Epistles

look like?

I Timothy=Reproof

II Timothy=Correction

Titus=Instruction in Righteousness

Philemon=Doctrine

Hebrews=Reproof

James=Correction

I Peter=Instruction in Righteousness

II Peter=Doctrine

I John=Reproof

II John=Correction

III John=Instruction in Righteousness

Jude=Doctrine

Seems sillier when you carry the pattern all the way through.

But of course, vpw said we can't carry the pattern all the way through,

and we HAVE to count 4 categories as 3,

and 9 Church Epistles as 7.

Oakspear: I'm sure there are sections of each epistle which contain elements of all 4. Remember they always said there is no reproof and correction for Thessalonians because God is going to pull off the hope and there can be no possibility of error? Well, twice it says to comfort one another with these words, so if people didn't do that they could be reproved, right?

But VP kept saying that the order of the church epistles did not vary in all greek texts, which wasn't true of the gospels or the other NT stuff and he (VP) treated them as a curriculum. Romans, Corinthians, and Galatians as doctrine reproof and correction to the individual believer, Ephesians Phillipians and Collosians as doctrine reproof and correction to the church as a whole, and Thessalonians as doctrine of the hope, the great equalizer.

Like I said, there can be elements of doctrine reproof correction and instruction in righteousness anywhere, but I see no evidence to refute VPs take on that.

BRAVO!

You just made my case FOR me!

All the Church Epistles are for doctrine, reproof, correction, instruction in righteousness.

Period.

You YOURSELF have seen as much, and SAID as much.

Therefore, to limit any one of them to 1/4 of that is to rob it of up to 3/4 of its purpose.

So, then,

is everyone saying (or almost everyone- STL has made exception)

that there's a separate issue between "forgiveness"

and "telling the truth" about them,

and that redemption AND forgiveness have NOTHING to do

with trusting them again, and pretending they never hurt anyone,

and that the trust and pretending they did no wrong is OUTSIDE

our responsibilities?

So, for example,

when discussing Herbert W. Armstrong,

we are NOT required to pretend he didn't do wrong,

or gloss over the hurts he did others?

You'll have to give me a little more than that.

Do you recall ANY of the lyrics- any 3 words together or SOMETHING?

"From the article: “In the UK, two way corps ministers have been putting forth focused believing action to move God’s Word as Outreach Ambassadors to the UK. Meanshile, at TWI International Headquarters, the international advanced leadership training was off to a tremendous start. “

“They are working together with the country coordinators of the UK, Mr. And Mrs. Rhys Mi11er, to further the expansion of the ministry in Southampton, a port city southwest of London.”

“Since their arrival in the UK, Rev & Mrs. Moynihan have organized a variety of Word-centered events, reaching out to impart God’s Word to those who are new to our ministry as well as to faithful believers. ...”

“Of course, as Outreach Ambassadors, the Moynihans have been working heartily to bring the Word to the hungry hearts in their community. They have gotten acquainted with the city and the people of Southampton by going out witnessing. They’ve been speaking God’s Word door-to-door, at neighborhood social functions, and at local shops. They have weekly household fellowship meetings as well as weekly outreach events for their fellowship and others in the branch.”

"Great Odin's raven!"

"Sweet Lincoln's mullet!"

"By the beard of Zeus!"

"Boy, that escalated quickly.

I mean, that really got out of hand fast."

"It jumped up a notch."

"It did, didn't it?"

So, I take it Kathy's not interested in clearing this one?

The airplay thing really was a rule so that we have SOME kind of shot at answering even the

tough ones. It also leaves out a number of songs I really like, but NEVER heard on the radio.

With all these fightin' words in mind, I offer this for the "toss-up":

"When my fist clenches, crack it open,

Before I use it and lose my cool"

Let's see how "Christian" everyone is here...

(Those of you who are not Christians are "completely off the hook" on this thread- it is not

addressed to you, but you may consider the posts "for your information." )

It has been claimed that the only appropriate thing for a Christian to do is to

forgive all Christians for sinning, categorically.

So, I'd like to see how far the Christians here are willing to extend their

Categorical Imperative.

Jim Baker (of PTL fame) lied, embezzled, and covered up sex acts that may or may

not have been consentual, and committed adultery. He was also convicted of

fraud, tax evasion and racketeering.

Does he get forgiven by other Christians now?

Does he get returned to his position as the leader of PTL?

Jimmy Swaggart spent church moneys on consentual sex acts with prostitutes.

When he was caught, he was willing to make a partial confession-that he

sinned, but not what his sins were, and compared himself to King David of Israel.

Does he get forgiven by other Christians now?

Does he get returned to his position as the leader of PTL?

Oral Roberts, finding his ministries' financies in dire straits, announced that God

was taking him hostage for $8 million. He spent large amounts of their finances

on expensive clothes, jewelry and a private jet.

Does he get returned to his position as a church leader?

Peter Popoff was publicly exposed by James Randi (the Amazing Randi) & Johnny Carson.

The apparent healing miracles and prophetic acts performed by Popoff were in fact part of an elaborately stage-managed setup, including planting of audience members and broadcasts to an in-ear radio receiver.

Does he get returned to his position as a church leader?

In 1991 ABC’s Primetime Live announced that prayer requests sent along with financial donations to Tilton's organization were being thrown away without being read.

Do we resume handing over the loot to him?

Jim Whittington spent 10 years in prison for money laundering, mail fraud, conspiracy, and interstate transportation of stolen property from his evangelist crusades and direct mail business in the 1980s.

He had high-speed boats and a Rolls-Royce.

David Koresh ran the controversial Branch Dividian group of Christians, which was considered

controversial. After a raid of their hq near Waco, Tx, they all died. Among other things,

Koresh claimed that, technically, all the women in his group belonged to him.

Does his name get restored to respectability now?

Herbert W. Armstrong was the leader of the Worldwide Church of God.

When alive, he committed sexual acts with his parishioners, including-and this was never challenged

by him when it was asserted-serial incest. He spent God's money on planes and all sorts of

luxuries.

He plagiarized "his" work, and claimed it was revealed to him by God. He claimed it was revealed to him ALONE in this century. He claimed his "ministry" was the sole "one true church" today.

He promised that financial success and an "abundant" life were there for people who followed his instructions.

He died never having offered reparations or apologies to even SOME of the Christians whose lives he ruined.

Shall we call him a wonderful Christian now?

Shall we gloss over the hurts he inflicted on his congregation?

I'm thinking it's Word Wolf's turn here...

George

D'OH!!!!!!

Sorry, forgot.

Ok. Next movie.

I've really wanted to use this quote.

"Boy, that escalated quickly.

I mean, that really got out of hand fast."

"It jumped up a notch."

"It did, didn't it?"

You can add Pat Powell in Tampa, Fl as a splinter group following Chris Geer. He is really into control and abuse. He actually threw me out for questioning him! Ha! He sexually abused my 5 year old son and is currently under investigation, Two of my older kids are still in brainwashed against me I have not seen them in over 3 years. I wrote Chris Geer about his abuse and for help in the situation, and he said he can't be responsible for the moral character of his liscensees!!!!

Gee, he seemed so nice during the few minutes I met him.

Could it be that he's manipulated his image, and the man he really was when

"no one was looking" was very different from the man we were shown in public?

Hm, sounds familiar...

Good one!

What was it Wierwille said man’s greatest spiritual problem was? I don’t remember.

"The Integrity of God's Word-Man's Greatest Spiritual Problem."

He also claimed "the Greatest Secret in the World Today" is

"the Bible is the Revealed Word and Will of God",

which obviously was wrong because-if no one else-

thousands of pfal grads knew it,

but NOBODY knows the date and time of Jesus Christ's return.

Now THAT's a secret!

Keep in mind Corinthians is a reproof epistle.

That's what vpw said, because that's what Bullinger said.

It looks neat on a chart, and sounds learned.

However, I question whether there's sufficient evidence to say that with

authority.

One could just as easily argue it's the doctrinal epistle of the manifestation

of the spirit, or declares the doctrine of the "Gathering Together".

Chapter 13 lists 16 characteristics about charity, 9 of which say what charity is NOT.

I agree, it does.

This does not make this a "reproof" epistle necessarily, since

discussions of what something IS often include what it is NOT.

pfal did this at all 3 levels when discussing the 9.

pfal was not a class of "reproof."

It was supposedly "a class on keys", if you believe itself.

Limiting yourself ONLY to the explanations in pfal means you limit yourself

ONLY to the answers and understanding of pfal.

Say What??

Could you repeat that in English please there is to much roundabout in this message.

Greg

I'll explain it for you.

Then there's verbs like "seems", "appears",

or "be", "is", and "was",

none of which need necessarily burn any calories or require deep thought.

verb required ACTION, but there are "passive verbs", verbs that do not

require action. I was pointing that out.

Someone's definition of "verbs" limited their understanding and left out

some verbs that didnt fit their neat little definition.

As for a "working definition" or a "rule of thumb", Greg,

that sounds fine.

Please keep in mind that the thing is ADVISORY and not an UNCHANGEABLE RULE.

So, you're not compelled to make everything conform to it.

The forcing of square pegs into round holes is lazy, damaging, and typical of

much of the "education" of a "good" wayfer.

(Not even getting into what the corps endured.)

This was addressing your original post, where you asked what people thought

of your definition.

I was saying it was not bad when used as a "rule of thumb", but it was

needlessly restrictive if you wanted to make it the SOLE rule for defining "love".

I also pointed out that people making any "rule of thumb" into the DEFINING

rule for ANYTHING tends to lead to misunderstandings.

Life doesn't fit in neat little definitions like we were taught it does,

and God does NOT live in any box or remain confined to any definition we can

find for Him.

Got it now?

Are you saying it would take rodeo school to make them clowns,

when in this day and age they're still willing to pay twi $cashola

to "teach" them how to perform manual labour?

Whether or not they wear the jester's motley, or paint their faces,

I think they're still playing the fool....

It is harder on the smaller corps groups without question; I learned 10 minutes was precious. I've heard they already have more than 4 for the next group (counting children).

Well,

children count so long as they'll also be doing the manual labour around

grounds, and going on potentially life-threatening activities like

hitchhiking to LEAD, rock-climbing without certified instructors,

and bullfighting.

Knowing the heartless, inhumane machines in charge of the programs,

it would not surprise me to hear they'd SEND 8-12 year olds to do any or all of the above.

Do they still ship the corps by bus to a farm to pick peppers and onions or whatever?

And if so, is that still obviously unpaid manual labour that they're PAYING for the

privilege of doing?

Then there's verbs like "seems", "appears",

or "be", "is", and "was",

none of which need necessarily burn any calories or require deep thought.

=====

As for a "working definition" or a "rule of thumb", Greg,

that sounds fine.

Please keep in mind that the thing is ADVISORY and not an UNCHANGEABLE RULE.

So, you're not compelled to make everything conform to it.

The forcing of square pegs into round holes is lazy, damaging, and typical of

much of the "education" of a "good" wayfer.

(Not even getting into what the corps endured.)

I agree.

Like some other resources, I find it a good thing to read through your paper from time to time,

to refresh my memory. (I don't agree with every single word, but I find even what I disagree

with to be instructive in its own fashion.)

I've heard that "raptures of the deep", also known as "nitrogen narcosis",

has produced hallucinations as well. I think most of us have heard something to that effect, actually.

I was unable to find documentation of this in a quick search,

but this is what I DID find.

http://www.wikiscuba.com/wiki/index.php/Nitrogen_narcosis

I think it may prove useful when discussing what astronauts experience,

since there may be similarities.

Lolita Davidovich

Intersection

Sharon Stone